Italy opens antitrust probe into Google because of a rejected Android Auto app(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Italy opens antitrust probe into Google because of a rejected Android Auto app
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/17/18629912/google-android-auto-italy-antitrust-probe-enel-group
5 コメント
The argument seems to be that Google is rejecting this app to force users to search for it in Google Maps. This is significant because that’s a different line of business for Google.
Apple is more restricted, but they do it for control of the user experience, which, as a developer, I’m not a fan of. Apple is in less businesses and don’t as frequently use their restrictions to direct/force users into another one. The one case I can think of is restrictions allowing only Apple Music. Though other music apps are supported in Car Play, Siri will only use Apple Music.
All that said... this case seems like a stretch. I’m not familiar with Italian law though, but is Android Auto so pervasive that this would have merit? The other antitrust suits are regarding search or Android, where Google has a much larger grip on their market.
Apple is more restricted, but they do it for control of the user experience, which, as a developer, I’m not a fan of. Apple is in less businesses and don’t as frequently use their restrictions to direct/force users into another one. The one case I can think of is restrictions allowing only Apple Music. Though other music apps are supported in Car Play, Siri will only use Apple Music.
All that said... this case seems like a stretch. I’m not familiar with Italian law though, but is Android Auto so pervasive that this would have merit? The other antitrust suits are regarding search or Android, where Google has a much larger grip on their market.
That might very well be because regulators are busy with Google, which has a greater impact.
I guess if you have a large enough hammer (antitrust probes/fines) then everything does become a nail, including application stores' guidelines.
Google allows third-party developers to develop Android Auto-compatible versions of their apps, but only if they offer media or messaging services. Enel X Recharge is mostly dedicated to helping drivers find charging stations for electric cars.
Why would you block apps that are direction services?
Why would you block apps that are direction services?
Media and Message apps fit in a framework that google has provided this allows them to update the android auto UI with no changes for any of these apps.
they haven't done this for map apps yet but Waze is now supported. but this took a long time.
it could be possible there building the framework for maps just there not ready for 3rd party's to access it
the internet is quick to judge but you have to walk before you run. this is a system that will run on millions of cars and in the future possibly billions.
with Android Automotive OS its going to be part of the car so getting this correct is a big deal you want it supportable well into the future.
they haven't done this for map apps yet but Waze is now supported. but this took a long time.
it could be possible there building the framework for maps just there not ready for 3rd party's to access it
the internet is quick to judge but you have to walk before you run. this is a system that will run on millions of cars and in the future possibly billions.
with Android Automotive OS its going to be part of the car so getting this correct is a big deal you want it supportable well into the future.
This is unlikely to be the reason since the 3rd party app was already developed for Android Auto and Google rejected it thereafter.
I work in the auto industry in HMDs, and I think the last comment was somewhat on the right track, but perhaps missing bits of a larger issue at hand.
We can get the impression that Waze was built on a lot of technical debt by the amount of corners Google had to cut to even get it on screen -- how much it doesn't fit in their UI framework, and how poorly it runs when streamed to the HMD. Even Google Maps in satellite view runs terribly on the 90% of vehicles on the road that implement Android Auto. The underlying protocol used to convey that amount of data to the HMD runs like crap on most vehicles, and for better or worse the current protocol is pretty much frozen in time because most vehicles don't apply OTA updates yet. (Some manufacturers even charge labor for applying updates!)
The reason I'm picking on Waze specifically though is because HMD's have much stranger User <-> Interface considerations for what is safe, legal, and not crappy UI design. Add fire to fury, the performance is barely passable today.
Apps must have this, and so will Google if they are to be successful here. Whether Google even knows where they're going with a reliable HMD framework for using cookie-cutter UI components is largely unknown, but I don't think they're satisfied with the current API.
We can get the impression that Waze was built on a lot of technical debt by the amount of corners Google had to cut to even get it on screen -- how much it doesn't fit in their UI framework, and how poorly it runs when streamed to the HMD. Even Google Maps in satellite view runs terribly on the 90% of vehicles on the road that implement Android Auto. The underlying protocol used to convey that amount of data to the HMD runs like crap on most vehicles, and for better or worse the current protocol is pretty much frozen in time because most vehicles don't apply OTA updates yet. (Some manufacturers even charge labor for applying updates!)
The reason I'm picking on Waze specifically though is because HMD's have much stranger User <-> Interface considerations for what is safe, legal, and not crappy UI design. Add fire to fury, the performance is barely passable today.
Apps must have this, and so will Google if they are to be successful here. Whether Google even knows where they're going with a reliable HMD framework for using cookie-cutter UI components is largely unknown, but I don't think they're satisfied with the current API.
That's exactly the sort of comment I come here for.
We retrofitted (i.e. hacked) AA onto my wifes 124 Spider. I've noticed it judders a lot when in satellite mode, but not in normal. Assumed this wouldn't be the case as it's essentially a video stream being played with touch events sent back and USB audio. Maybe some headunits are a bit underpowered for this?
That said on my Kia Cee'd it runs like a dream regardless, there is never a glitch.
Any more insight on the way AA and Carplay work from a manufacturers PoV?
We retrofitted (i.e. hacked) AA onto my wifes 124 Spider. I've noticed it judders a lot when in satellite mode, but not in normal. Assumed this wouldn't be the case as it's essentially a video stream being played with touch events sent back and USB audio. Maybe some headunits are a bit underpowered for this?
That said on my Kia Cee'd it runs like a dream regardless, there is never a glitch.
Any more insight on the way AA and Carplay work from a manufacturers PoV?
Did you install the AA hardware from Mazda, or are you using the software tweak, which is not known for performance
Can I put the Mazda hardware in the spider?
Yes, the infortainment (and almost all of the interior) is Mazda parts.
https://21stcenturyfiat124spider.wordpress.com/2019/02/18/un...
If you go through with it, pay attention to the version numbers.
I personally didn’t install it yet because previously you’d lose some functionality like navigation for the next owner. With the new tweaks that’s not an isssue.
-
The software AA is laggy because it’s essentially simulating proper AA.
There’s a note saying it’s not recommended anymore for being out of date and buggy
https://21stcenturyfiat124spider.wordpress.com/2019/02/18/un...
If you go through with it, pay attention to the version numbers.
I personally didn’t install it yet because previously you’d lose some functionality like navigation for the next owner. With the new tweaks that’s not an isssue.
-
The software AA is laggy because it’s essentially simulating proper AA.
There’s a note saying it’s not recommended anymore for being out of date and buggy
Awesome, thank you!
> ...most vehicles don't apply OTA updates yet. (Some manufacturers even charge labor for applying updates!)
Some vehicles' nav systems do not refresh the navigation data in any way unless you pay for the update and, as you say, pay labor to install the update. In other words the application code and navigation data are bundled. The update costs run about one iPhone XS per annum. From experience, the update is not even satisfying.
I certainly won't be looking to built-in nav in the future: too many opportunities to test my resolve to not feel bad about something expensive, disappointing, and out of my control. As long as smart phones fit in the cupholder I will use my phone.
Some vehicles' nav systems do not refresh the navigation data in any way unless you pay for the update and, as you say, pay labor to install the update. In other words the application code and navigation data are bundled. The update costs run about one iPhone XS per annum. From experience, the update is not even satisfying.
I certainly won't be looking to built-in nav in the future: too many opportunities to test my resolve to not feel bad about something expensive, disappointing, and out of my control. As long as smart phones fit in the cupholder I will use my phone.
could be base on the limits imposed by the video codec that they use to stream to the HMD this page https://www.mathieupassenaud.fr/build-your-own-android-auto-... talks about H264 but they also need USB data also for the touch controls
Thanks for posting this.
> Android auto is just a remote screen. Nothing is generated by the car display. A H264 video stream is generated by the Android App on the smartphone.
So ... the car really just needs to implement h264 streaming to be compatible? So there's exactly nothing special about bringing an app to Auto (in theory)?
> Android auto is just a remote screen. Nothing is generated by the car display. A H264 video stream is generated by the Android App on the smartphone.
So ... the car really just needs to implement h264 streaming to be compatible? So there's exactly nothing special about bringing an app to Auto (in theory)?
Does anyone have a screenshot of the rejected Android Auto app? Because my experience with apps from privatised government bodies isn't great and I can easily see how such an organisation can indeed create a buggy or unsafe app and cry wolf when they get caught out doing so.
It's usually hit or miss. The Italian post service for example provides 2FA for government services and it's pretty nice and easy to use (the website shows a QR code that you scan with the app).
>> "Android Auto is designed with safety in mind, to minimize distractions and to ensure apps can be used safely when driving"
> "Google allows third-party developers to develop Android Auto-compatible versions of their apps, but only if they offer media or messaging services."
Messaging while driving is distracting...
> "Google allows third-party developers to develop Android Auto-compatible versions of their apps, but only if they offer media or messaging services."
Messaging while driving is distracting...
I assumed "minimize distractions" = "meets regulatory compliance in areas it's going to be published to".
Doing anything but driving will driving is distracting but some things are illegal to do certain ways. E.g. in many places you can dictate a text but not operate a handheld phone.
Doing anything but driving will driving is distracting but some things are illegal to do certain ways. E.g. in many places you can dictate a text but not operate a handheld phone.
I bet a similar app wouldn't pass CarPlay standards, and Italy hasn't done anything on the issue